Ok, aquí vamos de nuevo!!!, Here we go Again!!! ... View more

Hello Guys!   I had the same problem and the solution was removing all references of the network in the Firewall ACLs. After I did it, I could delete the network from Addressing and Vlans section.   Hope it helps you all. ... View more

can you please provide me with a link stating that? ... View more

@CN this is so cool, thanks for sharing and thanks for introducing the idea to us in the first place 🙂   Here's the abstract to save you a click (though, of course, the rest of the paper is worth a perusal and they'll be updating with new info as it becomes available). So exciting to know we have been part of such an impactful project:   ... View more

If you are using Active Directory then you can tie that in to get more information.  Not the greatest for logging. ... View more

Unfortunately no, the Org/Network ID is not shown in the URL of the dashboard. To yet the org ID of the organization you have to use the API, to get all orgnanizations you have access to, and then filter the one you need. Then you use the org ID, to get all the network ID in that organization, of which you'll have to filter again to the that one specific network ID you wish to work on. That's already two API calls just to get the started on the actual task at hand. Bear in mind, that can be put in the script, but I like to do some one-liners first to make sure I get what I expect. Or just get that single piece of information that I need, via the API. ... View more

@wirelessnerdi will, for sure. ... View more

you can ask the meraki support (via support-case) to change the client VPN server default of  3des-sha1-modp1024 (= 3des-sha1-dh2) to  aes128-sha1-modp2048 (= aes128-sha1-dh14) unfort, although the IPSec protocol would support it, meraki can't activate both at the same time.   in case the chromebook requires sthg else, i bet you're out of luck (if your error is related to this). ... View more

The last time this exact scenario happen to me it was the cabling.   The formula for power loss is: P = I²R, where P=lost power, I=current and R=resistance Or something pretty similar to that.   The power lost increases proportionally with the resistance of the cable.  So the cable can work perfectly good for data, but due to resistance loses sufficient power so that it can not properly power what is plugged into its end.   Using a cable with a large copper core diameter reduces resistance.  Using a shorter cable reduces resistance.  Sometimes the ends are not fitted off poorly causing increased resistance.   But often - you just have to replace the cable with another one.   <rant on> Let me go completely off-topic for a bit.  This has really big implications that many people don't realise in the non-networking world. Lets say I have a 30m extension code.  I plug my electric saw into this, and the cord into a powerpoint.  Lets say I live in a country that uses 240V.  If I buy the cheapest extension lead with a core size of 1.0mm^2 instead of an extension lead with a core size of 2.5mm^2 I'll loose about 7% to 8% of the power to my saw - or my saw will be about 8% less powerful. Lets say I was now driving a motor that has to run at a fixed speed such as a compressor.  The compressor motor will now get hot and will eventually over a long period of time damage itself. Lets say I am putting in a big machine in a factory.  Using the smallest core size allowed by regulations might make my big machines run properly but the resulting power loss (compared to using a larger wire with a larger core size) may result in that machine using more electricity than it needed to for the rest of its life. </rant on> ... View more

  and yes, there is 15.28 available already for the MX. not sure why/how @ww can have Wi-Fi (MR) issues - maybe the MX/Z devices with integrated Wi-Fi … ... View more

Still nothing, right? Similar situation as in ipv6. ... View more

5 points 🙂 ... View more

Yeah I agree. I think it really depends on who you're talking to, If it's an IT Personnel, Non-Technical Staffs or whatever. It depends on different scenarios on what term should you be using towards that person. 🙂 ... View more

Here's my two cents.   Strangely enough, as per Meraki support, the throughput test is not a test to test your internet speed.   That being said, I've noticed the throughput tests on the MR and MX series to provide a more accurate estimation of the internet speed than the switches for some reason. So if you can test using a downstream MR or an upstream MX you'll likely get a better result (even if that AP has to go through the switch). ... View more

Unfortunately I can't find an official reference. But when googling I do find multiple recommendations to stay below /24 or /23 networks.   There's also this post: https://community.meraki.com/t5/Switching/Broadcast-domain-sizing/m-p/40919/highlight/true#M3422   Closest I've come to an official reference.   But it's not an exact science. Everything depends on the behavior if your clients, performance of the switches, and performance of the clients.   ... View more